Military

Further Reading

September 15, 1998

IRANIAN-AFGHAN TENSIONS: 'A FULL-BLOWN
REGIONAL CRISIS IS BREWING'

After a month of increasing
tensions between Iran and Afghanistan's ruling Taliban militia,
foreign
writers sounded the alarm that "a full-blown regional crisis is
brewing." Observers called on the
leadership in Iran to not let "its anger trigger a military
confrontation" and for both sides to find "a
diplomatic solution before the situation goes out of control."
Many feared a "dreaded scenario" in which
nations that are close to the looming conflict geographically,
ethnically or in terms of religious affiliation
would join sides with either predominantly Shiite Muslim Iran and
the faction that it is backing in
Afghanistan or with the Sunni Muslim Taliban. Analysts expressly
wondered whether Pakistan, India
and Russia--all three with nuclear arms--would "enter the fray."
Such a conflagration, these writers said,
would take the form of "a religious, strategic, regional and
economic war" that would "threaten to disturb
the delicate power balance in Central and South Asia, affecting
an arc of countries from Chechnya to
Tajikistan, including Iran." At stake, Madrid's independent
El Mundo said, "is more than just vengeance"
over the death of Iranian diplomats at the hands of the Taliban.
"Whoever controls Afghanistan controls
strategic land corridors between Russia, the Middle East and
South Asia" and access to important oil and
gas resources," the paper said. Most European pundits concluded
that the Iranian-Afghan tensions are
"in reality... about oil and pipelines" and that the U.S.' search
for energy resources in Central Asia led it
to back "the wrong horse in Afghanistan"--the Taliban. An
Italian paper said, "the Kabul road," which
represents the shortest way to convey Central Asian oil and gas
toward southern seas and the Karachi oil
terminals, is now fraught with "risks and traps" for the U.S.
These were salient points in the
commentary:

DIVIDING ISLAM: Arab writers were appalled by the prospect of
"open warfare" between two Muslim
regimes. Doha's semi-independent Al-Rayah maintained that
"dividing Muslims will only benefit foreign
powers hostile to Muslims, especially the U.S. and Israel."

VARIOUS LENSES: The vast majority of writers viewed the
conflict on the basis of where they sat. In
Pakistan, English-language papers found it "extraordinary" that
Islamabad's leadership "seems to have
put the emerging regional crisis on the back burner as if [it]
doesn't matter." The Peshawar-based
independent Frontier Post judged that the perception that
Pakistan is the only nation in the region that
still supports the Taliban "is a bad situation for a nation that
that has been desperately looking for
substantial trade and commercial links with Central Asia." Saudi
Arabia's London-based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat charged that the
U.S. has long wanted to involve Iran in a war to weaken it both
militarily and
economically. Algiers' French-language, independent El Watan
said that Algeria has no love for the
Taliban or the regime in Iran, since both sponsor international
terrorism. Buenos Aires' daily-of-record
La Nacion wondered whether the buildup of some 500,000
Iranian troops along Afghanistan's border was
motivated by political infighting between Tehran's conservatives
and moderates, and noted, "Iranian
President Mohamed Khatami...is a moderate leader who aspires to
open his country to the West and,
something worse, to separate religion from government issues."

According to conservative Ittefaq (9/15), "The UN
Security Council held a closed door session. The
Security Council president has spoken about holding an inquiry on
the killing of diplomats....
Meanwhile, tension between Iran and Afghanistan is increasing.
Not only the U.S., but many fear a
regional war between Iran and Afghanistan. War cannot be
desirable and war does not solve much. We
hope for a solution of the Iran-Afghan issue through the Security
Council. The Taliban force has been
created with the encouragement of Pakistan. It is hard to say
how genuinely they follow Islam. It is
really a matter of concern and fear the way they are imposing
regulations against women, treating foreign
media by labeling it a vehicle of alien culture, and taking
revenge against people. The fear is how can
people live under the Taliban rule. And the concern is that the
Taliban do not care for anybody at home
and abroad. Osama bin Ladin is the proof that they sponsor
international terrorism."

"Iran-Taliban Confrontation"

In the opinion of the
independent, English-language Bangladesh Observer (9/13),
"The Taliban are
introducing all kinds of hardline programs, ignoring human rights
and democratic principles in their own
country. But when it comes to foreign relations or relations
with its neighbors, it cannot make rules of its
own choice. Such relations are guided by internationally
acceptable principles and decorum. Any nation
violates them only at its own peril. The Taliban's hands are
full of internal troubles; if Iran joins the fray,
the country might go down on its knees before long. This will
worsen the situation of the common
Afghan people who have already suffered a lot. An escalation of
war in the region is a dreaded scenario.
We urge a diplomatic solution before the situation goes out of
control."

"Hornet's Nest"

The English-language Daily Star opined (9/13), "A war
is the last thing that the suffering humanity in
war-ravaged Afghanistan needs. And the leadership in Tehran
should understand that by thrusting a war
on the Taliban they can actually help them put down roots. It is
imperative that Iran does not let its anger
trigger a military confrontation in that sensitive geopolitical
region."

"Iran-Afghan Tension"

Anti-West Inqilab told its readers (9/13), "Both
countries can reach an understanding on issues related to
the killing of Iranian diplomats and the landing of Iranian
planes in an Afghan city. We fervently hope
that Iran and Afghanistan will sit for negotiations avoiding all
provocations and the path of conflicts and
resolve all issues across the table."

"Possible War Between Iran And
Afghanistan"

According to conservative Islamic Sangram (9/13),
"Whoever among the renegade Taliban groups
carried out the killing of the diplomats has done it out of
revenge. This cannot be supported by any
means. Similarly, it is not becoming of a responsible and big
Muslim country like Iran to take revenge
through fighting with a Muslim nation instead of resolving the
issue of killing of its diplomats through
negotiations. Efforts to create disunity and destroy peace in
the region drawing Pakistan into the issue
will be a great cause of concern for the entire Muslim world. We
hope that the responsible Iranian
leadership who has a separate image in the Muslim world will
follow a policy of solving issues with
patience."

PAKISTAN: "Unaffordable Confrontation"

An editorial in the centrist national daily News held
(9/15), "It is extraordinary that with a full-blown
regional crisis brewing in the wake of heightened Afghan-Iran
tensions, Pakistan's leadership does not
deem this worthy of any serious response.... In its frenzied
pursuit to manufacture a consensus on the
Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty--after working the public up
against this Convention for weeks on end
by bombastic official rhetoric--Islamabad seems to have put the
emerging regional crisis on the back
burner as if this doesn't matter....

"It is astonishing that today in the wake of growing Iranian
impatience and anger with events in
Afghanistan that has seen the killing of their diplomats as well
as the reported mass murders of ethnic
Hazara civilians in Mazar-I-Sharif, Islamabad has found it
appropriate not to emphatically respond by
sending a special envoy to Tehran to remove misperceptions and
move swiftly to reduce tensions with
Tehran. But then never before has our foreign policy been in
such inept hands or worse, on auto-pilot."

"Iran's Flawed Afghan Policy"

An op-ed column by Rahimullah Yusufzai said in the centrist
national News (9/15), "By holding
Pakistan, along with the Taliban, responsible for the arrest and
killing of its diplomats in Afghanistan,
Iran is again committing the same mistake which has always marred
its Afghan policy.... No civilised
country or individual would approve the killings of the Iranian
diplomats and the lone journalist in
Mazar-I-Sharif in northern Afghanistan.... Third, Iran should
have realised that the Taliban had suffered
heavily during their previous two attempts to capture
Mazar-I-Sharif and there was every possibility of
revenge killings once they entered the city. Between 2,500 to
4,000 Taliban were killed and captured in
Mazar-I-Sharif in May, 1997. Mass graves and wells stuffed with
their bodies were discovered later in
the Dasht-I-Laili desert near Shiberghan. Many of those killed
and captured were the relations and
friends of the Taliban who spearheaded the recent onslaught in
northern Afghanistan and attempts by
them to take revenge should not have been ruled out by all those
involved in the Afghan conflict."

"After Bamiyan's Fall

An editorial in the center-right national Nation said
(9/15), "When the season's fighting is over, a final
settlement will only be possible if all Afghan parties, whether
victorious or defeated, come to the
negotiating table, facilitated by all neighbours.... The Taliban
are frustrated at not being accorded
international recognition, but should realise that they will have
to demonstrate that they form a
responsible government, which is willing to pay heed to
international opinion and accommodate the
genuine concerns of their neighbours."

"Taliban In The Dock"

An editorial in the Peshawar-based independent Frontier
Post held (9/12), "The Central Asian nations
would increasingly abhor the militia's apparent savage ways.
Turkey is now playing host to some of the
top leaders of the northern forces who are opposed to the
Taliban. It would surely support Iran against
the militia. In a strong sense, Pakistan is the only nation in
the region that is still supportive of the
militia. This is a bad situation for a nation that that has been
desperately looking for substantial trade and
commercial links with Central Asia."

MIDDLE EAST

ALGERIA: "Iranian Audacity"

A front-page editorial in French-language, independent El
Watan stated (9/6), "Afghanistan arrested
some Iranian diplomats serving in Kabul and the Iranian response
could be a strike against the Taliban.
In order to justify its action against Afghanistan, Iran is
arguing that the UN Charter permits a country to
defend itself. However, the mullah's regime is in a precarious

position when it pretends to act according to international
law. Should we not remind the Iranian regime
that Khomeini was the one who started it all by illegally
confining U.S. diplomats in 1980 [sic] in
Tehran? The U.S. diplomats were released thanks in part to the
efforts of Algerian diplomats.... If the
Iranians and the Afghans decide to kill each other, Algerian
mothers won't be sad to hear it since both
bear a responsibility for what is now going on in Algeria.
Anyway, Algeria will not help Iran the way it
did in 1980."

EGYPT: "Islam Will Be The Loser"

Aref El Dessouki wrote in liberal opposition Al Wafd
(9/15), "It is clear that both Iran and Afghanistan
are being dragged into a war that has more than one goal. The
strings of this war are in the hands of
others. We Muslims are the worthless victims and the payers of
the bill, the stooges. Islam temporarily
is the loser until these junkies who call themselves Muslims wake
up and know that they are the fuel of
war."

"Khatami Won't Make
The Mistake Of Getting Mired In Afghani Swamp"

Ashraf Abu El-All, columnist
for pro-government Al Ahram, argued (9/11): "Despite the
massive
Iranian forces gathered on Afghani borders, and discussion of an
imminent all-out attack or partial attack
on Afghani territories to teach the Taliban a lesson, we don't
think Iranian leaders under the leadership of
Khatami can commit this military and strategic mistake. What is
probable and possible is that Iran will
arm and train the Afghani opposition to fight their own war
instead of getting involved in this Afghani
swamp. No one has entered this swamp and come out safely. The
USSR and Britain are witnesses."

QATAR: "Dividing
Muslims Will Only Benefit Foriegn Powers"

Semi-independent Al-Rayah held (9/15), "The
Iran-Taliban crisis is taking a dangerous turn, in which the
Iranian leadership should not indulge due to its responsibility
as an Islamic and regional power, and also
because it currently holds the presidency of the Islamic
Conference Organization. The spiritual leader of
Iran yesterday urged Afghan Shiites to repel the Taliban. Such a
call should have been addressed to all
Afghans, because everyone has suffered from the Taliban's
terrorism.... Muslims' unity is a sacred matter
that must be treated with great care. Dividing Muslims will only
benefit foreign powers hostile to
Muslims, especially the United States and Israel."

"Taliban Troop Buildup"

According to semi-independent Al-Watan (9/14): "The
Iranian troop buildup along the Afghan border is
only a show of force. Its aim is to stop the Taliban from
committing massacres in Bamiyan and to put
pressure on them so that they can name or even hand over those
who murdered the Iranian diplomats.
Nonetheless, this show of force can turn into a real
confrontation if the Taliban carry out massacres in
Bamiyan similar to the ones they committed in Mazar-e-Sharif. It
would be very difficult for Iran to
restrain itself if that happens, even if it meant having to wade
into the Afghan quicksand. Naturally, the
Taliban are responsible for any dangerous development of this
type. The movement can avert danger by
not taking any step that will escalate an already-critical
situation. If they unleash themselves and start
killing innocent people, they will be inviting innumerable
consequences. This is what the Taliban must
realize as they celebrate their delusive victory."

SAUDI ARABIA: "Logical End Of Dual Containment
Policy"

London-based, pan-Arab Al-Hayat had this editorial
(9/8): "It is no secret that the United States has
always wanted, since the Gulf War, to drag Iran into a certain
war to create an opportunity to destroy its
renewed military machinery and to weaken further its already weak
economy.

"This is the ultimate and logical end of the dual containment
policy.... It is clear that the states of the
region, including the Gulf Cooperation Council states, do not
want such a war or any other war at all.
Iran and Taliban must contain their differences and to solve it
through diplomatic means."

EAST ASIA

INDONESIA: "Tension
at the Iran-Afghanistan Border"

Independent afternoon daily Suara Pembaruan
editorialized (9/12): "If tensions mount as a result of the
two sides' military maneuvers on the border, there are several
possible results. First, Afghanistan will
find it more difficult to achieve reconciliation among its
conflicting factions. Second, Taliban forces will
weaken in the face of another adversary--Iranian troops with
comparatively greater and more
sophisticated machinery. Third, it is probable that major powers
such as the U.S. and Russia will take a
hand--as will pro-Afghan countries (Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan,
etc.) which are geographically and
ethnically close to the Northern Afghan tribes. Pro-Taliban
Pakistan is unlikely to remain idle. In our
opinion, an open battle between Taliban and Iranian troops should
be avoided because of the additional
suffering it would cause the Afghans."

EUROPE

GERMANY: "Search For Referee In Islamic
Conflict"

Thomas Avenarius had this to say in an editorial in centrist
Sueddeutsche Zeitung of Munich (9/15),
"Iran is planning to station 200,000 soldiers on its border with
Afghanistan.... Together with the 70,000
forces the country stationed over the past few weeks, this is a
large-scale army which is ready to
commence operations. The barefoot army of the Taliban would have
almost nothing in its hands to
counter such operations. Nevertheless, Iran should not make the
mistake of invading. The outcome
would be too uncertain and the violation of international law
would be too serious. It is more likely that
the Iranians will take revenge for the killing of their diplomats
with targetted air strikes. Tehran is now
rightfully worried about the fate of the Shiite minority living
in Afghanistan.... An international
commission is to investigate the death of the Iranian diplomats,
and an investigation regarding charges of
genocide would be in the interests of all. Nobody seriously
wants a confrontation between the two
Islamic regimes."

"Powder Keg"

Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau (9/15) carried
this editorial by Karl Grobe: "Iran's religious leader
Ayatollah Khamenei is warning against a war in the whole region,
and Iran's regime is preparing for it,
just as is the Taliban in Afghanistan.... Another alarming sign
is that Mehdi Khamran has taken over
military coordination. He also led the Iranian forces in the war
against Iraq. The killing of Iranian
diplomats...could really be the fuse that could ignite the powder
keg and result in a large-scale war in the
region. The fact that the Iranian leadership is obviously
playing with the idea of carrying out a 'punitive
action' such as the United States did in Afghanistan, is only an
ironic twist. On the surface, the
confrontation focuses on the fight against terrorism, but in
reality it is about oil and pipelines. The
United States is pinning its hopes on the 'Iranian variant': to
build pipelines from Kazakhstan and
Turkmenistan across the Persian North to Turkish Mediterranean
ports by bypassing Iraq. The Tehran
leadership is also supporting this project."

"Iran Masses Troops Along Afghanistan
Border"

Right-of-center Straubinger Tagblatt/Landshuter Zeitung
stated (9/15), "It is still hard to assess whether
there is something behind the threat of the Iranian Security
Council to wage a war against the Taliban. In
any case, we must keep in mind that Tehran intends to stage a
large-scale maneuver along the border area
with Afghanistan at the end of September. But this cannot leave
neighboring states such as Russia cold.
Russia, in particular, needs peace along its borders.
Afghanistan and Iran can also assume that, after the
Russian disaster in Afghanistan, Moscow is not likely to have the
will, let alone the military power to
intervene in countries outside of its own borders."

ITALY: "Religious
War"

In the words of left-leaning, influential La Repubblica
(9/15), "Iran is only one step away from war with
Afghanistan.... This would be a religious, strategic, regional
and economic war. All the ingredients are
present to ignite a conflict. But probably a final decision will
come from the uncertain domestic Iranian
front. Not a single day goes by without a new terrorist attack
or aggression against a member of the
theocratic regime. The radicals seem to be the most eager for
war, seeing it as an excellent chance to kill
the reformist policy of President Khatami."

"Iran Accuses: U.S. Interferences In Crisis With
Afghanistan"

A commentary by Alberto Negri in leading business daily Il
Sole-24 Ore (9/8): "Bordering on three
nuclear powers--India, Pakistan, and China--Afghanistan
represents the shortest way to convey Central
Asian oil and gas towards southern seas and the Karachi oil
terminals in Pakistan.... Too bad for
Washington that the Kabul road is so full of risks and traps:
The decision to support the Talibans has, for
now, proven to be only partially right." Negri, however,
concluded on an optimistic note: "Iran is
perhaps more committed at this time to ably rebuilding its
international relations than willing to engage
in a new war. After all diplomacy--political diplomacy as well
as oil diplomacy--can be carried out
through less ruinous solutions than a conflict."

"The Two
Islams"

An editorial in left-leaning, influential La Repubblica
held (9/6), "The Iran-Afghanistan conflict is
revealing a surprising axis among Iran, Russia, India, Uzbekistan
and Tajikistan versus the axis uniting
the Talibans, the United States, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. It
is obvious that, even for the Muslims, in
the end the 'reason d'etat' prevails over religion."

POLAND: "Washington Sees In Iran An Ally In Struggle
Against Taliban"

Center-left Zycie Warszawy ran this article (9/8) by
Jacek Potocki: "Two weeks after the bombing of
Osama bin Laden's headquarters, the United States sees a
brilliant opportunity to fight the Taliban--which
gives seclusion to terrorists--without entering into conflict
with its close ally in the Arab world Saudi
Arabia--which backs them [Taliban]--by supporting Iran. The U.S.
does not want to be directly involved
in combating the orthodox Afghans it for years assisted
politically, militarily and financially in their fight
against Russian invaders. Since the collapse of the Shah and
seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran by
Islamic students in 1979, the traditional relationship between
the two states has been hostile. Will the
Americans propose an Iranian reconciliation and assistance in
return for [Iran's]

tormenting the Afghan Taliban?"

SPAIN: "The Taliban Menace"

Independent El Mundo opined (9/12): "Recent military
victories by the Sunni Taliban, intent upon
imposing the most fanatical and violent interpretation of Koranic
law in Afghanistan, threaten to disturb
the delicate power balance in Central and South Asia, affecting
an arc of countries from Chechnya to
Tajikistan, including Iran.... At stake is more than just
vengeance [over the death of eleven Iranian
diplomats at the hands of the Taleban]; whoever controls
Afghanistan controls strategic land corridors
between Russia, the Middle East and South Asia. If the ethnic
Pushtu Taliban succeed in implanting
their medieval system nationwide, millions of Uzbeks, Tajiks and
Hazari Shiites will seek refuge in
neighboring countries in a flight from ethnic cleansing. And the
danger that Pakistan, India and Russia--all three with nuclear
arms--will enter the fray would increase.... Only the great
Western powers can
avoid an escalation of the conflict and renewed genocide if they
apply firm pressure on Pakistan to
restrain its 'Koranic students' and to foster a power-sharing
arrangement in Kabul among the principal
Afghan ethnic groups."

SWEDEN: "Talibans, A Worry Also To Iran"

Stockholm's independent, liberal morning Dagens Nyheter
(9/10) held, "There is a risk of the spread of
the militant Islamic movement in the unstable Middle East, Asia
region.... In washington, which has
strained relations with both Baghdad and Kabul, to say the least,
there is concern that an armed conflict
might destabilize the entire region.... It seems that now
another powder keg is forming before the very
eyes of a powerless international community; preventive diplomacy
once again has run into difficulties....
But what could have been done? Are there reasonable,
non-military ways to handle a regime which
brutally wants to take its people back to the Middle Ages?"

TURKEY: "Iran And Taliban"

Fikret Ertan wrote in pro-Islamic Zaman (9/15): "The
tension between Iran and Taliban prompts the
question of whether Iran is going to launch a military strike in
Afghanistan. The Taliban- ran
relationship was not good, even before the present tension. Iran
now has two demands: The Taliban
leadership should turn over the bodies of murdered Iranian
diplomats, and hand over the murderers to
Iran. It seems this will not happen. The second demand is that
Taliban should issue a formal apology,
something which is rejected by Taliban.... Iran will never
accept discontinuing its influence over
Afghanistan. A clash between Taliban and Iran seems
inevitable."

"A New Fireball"

Sami Kohen wrote (9/8) in mass-appeal, circulation
Milliyet: "Despite its strong show of force against
the Taliban, Iran is not expected to attack Afghanistan. Iran
somehow wants to intimidate the Taliban
from going further and gaining total control, and wants to give
the opposition forces time to collect
themselves. Pakistan on the one side, and Iran and Russia on the
other, want to manipulate developments
in Afghanistan. If Taliban seizes full control over Afghanistan,
Kabul will inevitably become a center
for exporting its fundamentalist regime, a development that will
surely destabilize Central Asian
countries. Turkey is worried that about 6 or 7 million Turkic
people might be oppressed, or assimilated
in the northern parts of the country. Turkey is also concerned
that Afghanistan might become a haven for
terrorists, and a center for the narcotics trade. That is why
Ankara is supporting a coalition
administration for Afghanistan, with the participation of all
political forces in the country.
Unfortunately, President Demirel's call on interested countries
to cooperate for a solution is being left
without a response."

LATIN
AMERICA

ARGENTINA: "Alleged
Iranian Attack In Afghanistan"

Ricardo Lopez Dusil, international analyst for daily-of-record
La Nacion held (9/11), "The military
tension between Iran and Afghanistan, the two most radical
Islamic regimes in power, places the whole
of Central Asia at a point of conflict. It has not been ruled
out that a possible escalation of war between
the two countries...could spread to other neighbor countries,
especially the six Muslim countries
disintegrated from the former Soviet Union...with which the
Kremlin keeps an agreement of mutual
economic defense and cooperation....

"Most nations in the world keep on recognizing Burhanudin
Rabbani, as president of Afghanistan, who
was overthrown by Talibans and is currently exiled in Turkey. In
addition to merely recognizing
Rabbani as president of Afghanistan, Iran and Russia provide
military and economic support to the forces
which keep loyal to Rabbani.... The Taliban government...is only
recognized by Pakistan, the United
Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. A wide fringe of countries,
including the United States, keeps a
prudent distance, which aims at preserving valuable interests in
the region....

"Iran's military maneuvers... consisted of the deployment of
70,000 soldiers and several fighter bombers
on the borderline (with Afghanistan). U.S. sources admitted that
it was the greatest military exhibition
in Iran since the triumph of the Islamic revolution in 1979. The
fact that Talibans are Sunni and Iranians
Shiite is not enough to explain the mutual hatred...one should
bear in mind that wars are always
politicial, not rather than religious. One kills because of
power, not faith, except when faith grants power.
Jihad...is only aimed at getting the support of people....
Perhaps the Iranian demonstration of force is not
only aimed at the Taliban, but also a product of an internal
political fight. Iranian president Mohamed
Khatami...is a moderate leader who aspires to open his country to
the West and, worse, to separate
religion from government issues. The real power in Iran is held
by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in his role of
Iran's spiritual guide.... Although the Tehran establishment
despises Khatami because he...visits and
supports the poor but does not have any power, one may not ignore
his incredible popularity. In fact,
which is what keeps him standing."